Please pray for the Jehovah's Witnesses
I've always thought of Jehovah's Witnesses as a cult but never fully studied it. I had a couple that wanted to come teach me about their group and I invited them to come. I figured if they are a part of a cult it would be a chance for me to lead them away and if they are just a misunderstood group of Christians I would find that out.
Well I've met them 3 times over the last weeks and I'm amazed at how much of a cult it really is. They are under the full control of the leaders. To give you an idea I asked them to say what Thomas said of Jesus when he felt the holes in his hands. If you don't know the verse look at John 20:28. Thomas said to Jesus "my Lord and my God!" So I asked them to say that to Jesus as one of his followers. They refused. I had read online that they would not acknowledge Jesus as God, but I was still shocked that they wouldn't say of Jesus what Thomas had said. It was sad to watch them stumble and try to say "I'll say Jesus is my Lord" or "Jesus is a God" Or "Jesus is my Lord and savior" They wouldn't say it out loud. How can organization that follows Jesus not be allowed to say what the closest followers of Jesus said regularly.
Anyway I have spent many, many hours in study when not working over the last few weeks and I will likely spend many more since they will be coming back next Tuesday. Please be in prayer for them, I really believe one of them is coming around to the thinking that his group isn't all it claims to be.
- Shayne's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Response to JW's
We've been over that
I'm quite skilled with study and have no difficulty putting them in a position where they must accnoledge the plurality of the God in the old testimate. Even Deut 6:4 where the Bible says "the Lord our God is one" was turned back when they discovered the same Hebrew word for one is used as you indicated in Genesis about a man and wife becoming one flesh. The deffinition of that word allows for more than one thing to be united. But That is not what I want prayer for. The scriptures and the truth of Gods word stands up for itself when studied.
My prayer is for them to be set free. They claim they are the only religion with the truth, that all other branches of cristianity were inspired by Satan. Yet, they have no freedom. They can't even verbaly reapeat the words of a diciple for fear of being repremanded and removed from the church. They are like the pharasee that complained about Jesus allowing the woman to worship at his feet. She washed his feet with her tears and her hair. He was so busy being the only informed person in the room that he missed the chance he had to really have a relationship with God. They live in fear of loosing their salvation at all times. They constantly must witness and keep time cards to make sure they do it enough or else they can lose the salvation they are "working for" When they become one they cut ties with most friends and family and when they convert away from Jehovah's Witness no one is allowed to speak to them or even touch something they wrote. It is an organization that preys upon those who desire a relationship with God and through fear maintains control.
During our talk I showed them many places where their documents had quoted sources other than the Bible. I used other sources because these could be seen unarduably, and were not part of translations from greek or hebrew that could be disputed. So I showed them the quotes they would take and twist and change or leave parts out for the purpose of decieving the reader. When I asked if an organization that purposely misquotes is misleading or worse their response was to say well if its misleading someone towards the truth?
I think they are becoming a little bit doubtful of the organization. I think it is fear that keeps them from saying that they are having doubts. I hope that I can generate doubt so that I or someone else can someday set them free. Like Levi's to the Soviet Union I hope the word of God will speak truth and destroy the propaganda they have heard.
Shayne McKinney
Response
JWs
I am an ex-Jehovah's Witness. For 40 years I was in the Organization, an elder for some of that time. I left when i discovered that the Society had massaged and lied about their history, that they had affiliated themselves to the United Nations for 10 years, while proclaiming that it is one of the Devils foremost tools, and that they taught for 80 years that the generation that saw 1914 would see Armageddon and then changed it when it became patently obvious that it wasnt going to happen...but worse, blamed it on the brothers and sisters being over eager and anxious to see this system end! The list goes on.....
Once you become a JW, your mind IS closed. You are not allowed to examine your own faith, if you find 'something lacking'. If you have a question or doubt, you cannot voice it...You must leave it to Jehovah. (the Governing Body) You persist with your questioning and you will soon find yourself villified, disfellowshipped and shunned by everyone, including your family....and labelled 'apostate' a word imprinted on every Jehovah's Witness mind by the Society as the very epitome of evil. It does not matter if what you said was true or not, your motives and you as a person will be attacked, you are one of the Devil's own, seeking to turn people away from the true faith.
It displays many qualities of a cult. They say everything they believe is from the Bible, but they rely on a group of men in Brooklyn to interpret it for them. It does not matter what you think the Bible says, if the men in Brooklyn change it, you will believe that., and you will say in all sincerity..'thats what the Bible says!'
I am not disfellowshipped, but because I was upset and wanted answers to sincere questions, I found myself shunned by quite a number of JWs. Again it is reinforced and imprinted on the minds of believers that you cannot leave for a genuine conscientous, sincere motive...it has to be a selfish motive, greed, immorality, rebelliousness, even laziness. Not true..I know many, many ex JWs who are very hurt because they are prevented from having a voice, being able to put forth their concerns and their stories about why they left. It is a very very effective strategy for preventing those who have left from talking to those who are still in..Why? If they have the 'truth' what is there to fear?
I know 3 Ex- Jehovah's Witness
Jehovah's Witnesses
Hello,
Thank you for your courage and patience in trying to help these people get saved. Forgive me if you've already seen these examples, but Compare Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58. In Exodus 3:14, Jehovah calls Himself I AM, and Jesus calls Himself I AM in John. In Isaiah 44:6, Jehovah calls Himself the "First and the Last". In Revelation 22:13, Jesus called Himself the "First and the Last".
I have a .pdf file with several of these examples, which I can e-mail to you if you're interested. I'll be praying for you and the Jehovah's Witnesses.
Thanks,
Bill
billsphillips@hotmail.com
Response
Hi Shayne,
I happen to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses and I'm glad that you have an interest in the Bible along with such a concern for others so that you're willing to have an ongoing conversation at the door. It's understandable that you have certain negative opinions of Jehovah's Witnesses, as probably most people we meet do, but perhaps I can provide you with our point of view on some of these matters.
I think the disagreement over John 20:28 stems from the difference in interpretation, where you believe that it is affirming Jesus as the only true God. We disagree with this interpretation. Scrolling down just three verses we find that John himself explains the purpose of his writing, along with its proper interpretation, "these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God." So the conclusion that should be drawn from Thomas' words and elsewhere in the book is that Jesus is God's Son, not 'God the Son.' Now, there is some disagreement on whether or not Thomas' exclamation was meant as praise for Jesus and his Father or just for Jesus alone (as in your view). But if indeed the latter is true, we are able to harmonize this with John 20:31 by keeping in mind that the title "God," as used in the Bible, was not necessarily exclusive of the Almighty.
Jehovah's Witnesses freely admit that Jesus is a "Mighty God," yet he is nowhere described as the "Almighty" as is his Father, Jehovah. (Isaiah 9:6) Others in the Bible, such as angels and certain human judges, are also described as "gods." (Psalm 8:5; Psalm 82:6) Even Moses is called elohim or "God." (Exodus 7:1) So how are we to understand Jesus' godship in relation to his Father's?
Jesus tells us plainly that his Father is "the only true God." (John 17:3) When Jesus is called "Good Teacher," Jesus corrects the man saying, "Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God." (Mark 10:18) These are just a couple of examples, but the natural implication is that Jesus recognizes his Father, and his Father alone, as God Almighty, the only true God. Jesus can only be termed "God" in a relative sense as are the others listed above. He is the only-begotten Son of God and his primary representative. (John 7:28,29) After his resurrection he was appointed over all things by God, and is subject to no one except God. (1 Corinthians 15:27,28)
As for the topic of freedom, I truly appreciate your concern, though I think that you do not fully understand our true motives. Speaking from my perspective, I can honestly say that I go door-to-door witnessing to my neighbors, not for fear of any man, but out of love for Jehovah and for the people I meet. Really, if anything, fear of man inhibits me from doing the witnessing work that Jesus commissioned us to do. (Matthew 28:19,20) People today generally do not like to be disturbed, and many feel that they are too busy for religion.
I have never been taught, nor have I ever believed, that I must earn my salvation as you have claimed above. Just the opposite really. The prospect of everlasting life is a free gift made possible by the ransom sacrifice for those who display faith. But I am also aware that the Bible says that "faith without works is dead." (James 2:26) There are some other things you state that I feel misrepresents us. I'll just say that I tend to find that Jehovah's Witnesses are usually educated, open-minded and, above all, loving people, which is part of the reason why I began associating with them to begin with. (John 13:35) And if our organization was really a cult determined to isolate and control its members, what sense would it make to encourage us to speak with everyone we meet, including intelligent ones like yourself, about the Bible? I would think that that would threaten the control.
Thanks,
TJ
"must earn my salvation" ???
Watchtower Publication 2001:
Jehovah, the "Hearer of Prayer"
16 Important lessons can be learned from what happened to Israel. We see that Jehovah is "good and ready to forgive." (Psalm 86:5) As imperfect creatures, we depend on his mercy and forgiveness to receive salvation. No works of ours can help us to earn these blessings. However, Jehovah does not extend forgiveness indiscriminately. Only those who repent of their sins and turn around are in line for divine pardon.—Acts 3:19.
Watchtower 2000:
Once, a rich young Israelite ruler asked Jesus: "What must I do to inherit everlasting life?" (Mark 10:17) His question may have reflected the prevailing Jewish thinking of his time—that God demands certain good works and that by performing enough of those works, one can earn salvation from God. But that kind of formal devotion could spring from selfish motives. Such works failed to provide a sure hope of salvation, since no imperfect human could really measure up to God’s standards.
9 In answer to the man’s question, Jesus simply reminded him that he should obey God’s commandments. The young ruler quickly assured Jesus that he had kept them from his youth on. His response moved Jesus to feel love for him. Jesus said to him: "One thing is missing about you: Go, sell what things you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven, and come be my follower." The young man, however, went away grieved, "for he was holding many possessions." Jesus thereafter emphasized to his disciples that excessive attachment to this world’s goods gets in the way of attaining salvation. He added that no one can gain salvation by his own efforts. But Jesus went on to reassure them: "With men it is impossible, but not so with God, for all things are possible with God." (Mark 10:18-27; Luke 18:18-23)
Watchtower Publication 'Seeking First the Kingdom" 1993:Do Jehovah’s Witnesses think that somehow they are earning salvation by their preaching activity? Not at all! The book United in Worship of the Only True God, which has been used since 1983 to help students to advance to Christian maturity, discusses this matter. It states: "Jesus’ sacrifice has also opened to us the opportunity for eternal life . . . This is not a reward that we earn. No matter how much we do in Jehovah’s service, we can never build up such merit that God will owe us life. Eternal life is ‘the gift God gives . . . by Christ Jesus our Lord.’ (Rom. 6:23; Eph. 2:8-10) Nevertheless, if we have faith in that gift and appreciation for the manner in which it was made possible, we will make this manifest. Discerning how marvelously Jehovah has used Jesus in accomplishing His will and how vital it is that all of us follow Jesus’ steps closely, we will make the Christian ministry one of the most important things in our life."
Do you not keep track of your time preaching?
Do you keep up with your time spent "witnessing?" Do you not fill out cards that record your time?
Oh I forgot Jesus said "though shalt fill track every hour that you spend in teaching that you might know how much you spent for no reason since you don't actually earn your salvation." Book of Doesn't exist Verse 7.
Let me ask a pointed question.
Can a person on their death bed who has lived a willingly wicked life accept Christ and be forgiven?
The JW's in my house this week said "no" It takes months. Why does it take months if you arn't earning or working for something. Last time I checked something that doesn't have to be earned or worked for can be gotten immediately unless you have to wait for it to come in the mail.
Shayne McKinney
Here is something else for Jehovah's Witnesses
From the gentleman who replied earlier.
Jehovah's Witnesses are in the organization because they sincerly feel that it is the Truth; therefore, to condemn them because they did not want to repeat what they felt was totally false does not seem reasonable. Would you rather they be part of an organization where anyone coming along could change their views?
now about changing views check out this link
http://www.carm.org/jw/false_prophecies.htm
In 1926 Jehovah's witnesses still celibrated Christmas
In 1914 Jehovah's witnesses said would be the end yet when it passed they realized they forgot there is no year 0 AD or 0 BC so they had to add a year and make it 1915. Now when you ask one they say that christ returned in 1914. Did the zero year get added back in again? No they just changed the start of their math from 606 BC to 607 BC. I guess that makes sense they had it mathmatically wrong, yet then they had the wrong starting year?
Enough said.
Shayne McKinney
Change can be good
Hi Shayne,
All this means is that we are willing to adjust what we teach when new evidence or a better understanding of the available evidence comes to light. Believe it or not, this is an aspect of the religion that most of us find most appealing, since there are many churches out there that choose their traditions over truth. We are proud to be progressive. When you read how God dealt with his people in the past, you will notice that he progressively revealed things to them. It is the same situation today.
When the pagan roots of Christmas became plainly known to us, we were willing to give it up in accord with 2 Corinthians 6:14-17. With regard to Biblical prophecies concerning the last days, which we are now living in, we are fully willing to change our understanding of these as they play out. After all, these have been "made secret and sealed up until the time of the end." It is in this time of the end that "many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined . . . the ones having insight will understand." (Daniel 12:9,10) Doesn't this imply that God's people would be willing to change and be refined?
You have taken specific issue with the change in date of Jerusalem's fall from 606 BCE to 607 BCE, as if this was done for the sole purpose of retaining the 1914 date when it became known that the year 0 should not be included in the calculation. But there was actually good reason for the change. It is almost universally agreed upon today that the year 539 BCE marks the date that Babylon was conquered by Cyrus, and the Bible tells us that the Jews returned to their land 2 years later, which would be 537 BCE. It is stated plainly in the Bible several times that the desolation of Jerusalem lasted 70 years. So we go back 70 years from 537 BCE (when the desolation ended), which gives us the date 607 BCE. So there is a biblical basis for using 607 BCE, it wasn't chosen to meet our preconceived beliefs.
Thanks,
TJ
You know
Every source christian or secular other than JW's seem to put the date of the Babylonian invasion at 586-597 BC.
Also the Jews used a lunar calender with 360 days verses 365 1/4 we use. That means that over the 2520 years you state to come up with your date you would lose around 36 years. Just so you know.
Also changing some belief like Christmas is one thing. I don't support pagan christmas santa or even the time of year as being associated with Christ. But False Prophecy is considered pretty bad in the Bible? I don't remember God saying to stone the people celebrating Christmas. In fact as I recall Paul had words to say about those who consider one day more sacrad than the next and those who don't? I think thats in the book of Romans.
The Bible is against false prophets. And your orginization has claimd the future too many times and been wrong on every count. In matthew Jesus said not to believe those who claim the son of man has come because when he does come it will be as lightning in the east is visable in the west-- paraphrase in intrests of time.
So yes changing a teaching is fine changing facts like the date of an invasion in order to make youself not look like a false prophet. That is a little different.
Phillipians 2:9 nice that The Watchtower added the word "other" to match their theology.
Shayne McKinney
Let's check our watch. :)
Hey again Shayne,
It is true that most religions and secular sources put Jerusalem's destruction at about 587/86 BCE. But why is this? Because they rely on a tablet for that date over the Biblical evidence. The Bible repeatedly makes it clear that Jerusalem would be desolated for 70 years, whereas this tablet would only allow for about 50, thus invalidating the Bible. (cf. 2 Chronicles 36:21; Daniel 9:2) When an archeological source, which can easily be dubious, contradicts the Bible's clear testimony, which time and again has been vindicated as reliable, Jehovah's Witnesses don't hesitate to give the benefit of the doubt to the Bible's testimony.
You mentioned that the Jews used a lunar calendar consisting of 360 days and conclude that this would throw off the calculation of 2520 years starting from 607 BCE. Here's the problem with that. The Hebrew people did have a calendar that was lunar-centric, however they apparently did adjust it from time to time in order for it to coincide with the solar year, which is what our calendar is based on. In the fifth century BCE this practice of adjusting the calendar by adding days was systematized into the Metonic Cycle, which grouped these added days into an intercalary month, called Veadar, that was used seven times every 19 years. It is somewhat similar to our leap years. So 2520 years from 607 BCE would indeed come out to 1914 CE for the Hebrews, when you account for the adjustments they made to keep up with the solar year.
You mentioned false prophecy. I think what you are failing to distinguish is the big difference between false prophecy and wrong interpretations of prophecies found in the Bible. According to how you have used the term "false prophets," the Apostle Peter is a false prophet. (see John 21:20-23) Peter misunderstood Jesus' words and actually taught the disciples that the Apostle John would not die before Jesus' return, effectively putting a time constraint on him. It is interesting that he is not condemned as a false prophet for his misunderstanding.
As for Philippians 2:9, the addition of the word "other" with 'every/all' is an accepted translation practice. Virtually all translations 'add' the word "other" in such circumstances where the context demands it, i.e. when it is implied in the Greek text. (e.g. Luke 13:2) That bringing out these types of implied elements is legitimate can also be seen in another letter of Paul. He wrote to the Corinthians, "But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected [to Jesus],’ it is evident that it is with the exception of the one who subjected all things to him." (1 Corinthians 15:27) Paul recognized that the Father was at all times superior to his Son, this was "evident" to him even if it wasn't explicitly stated.
Thanks for your time,
TJ
dates
Good Question
More importantly in Matthew 24:23-27. It says specificly that people will say "there is the Christ" or "There he is" do not believe it. ... For as Lighting flashes in the east is seen in the west so will be the coming of the Son of Man. --Paraphrase with left out stuff.
Another words the Jehovah's witness claims that Christ returned in 1914 and no one saw him. Yet he says we will see him? That sounds like the Jehovah's Witnesses meet the discription Jesus told us to avoid.
Shayne McKinney
The purpose of that sermon
Hi Shayne,
I believe what is being spoken of there are false Christs, which is evident in verse 24. But can Jesus' disciples ever discern his presence? Consider the point of his sermon there. His disciples asked him, "what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?" (Matthew 24:3) Jesus goes on to describe world conditions that would act as evidence that Jesus has begun his presence.
This is why he says in Matthew 24:32-33, "Now learn from the fig tree as an illustration this point: Just as soon as its young branch grows tender and it puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. Likewise also you, when you see all these things, know that he [Jesus] is near at the doors." Look carefully at those signs Jesus described, they are happening on an unprecendented scale throughout the world today.
TJ
So Jesus came and no one saw him
Lightning in the east is seen from the west was just figurative he really didn't mean we'd be able to see him. Jesus liked to make things confusing for everyone right.
Like when he gave the parable of the rich man and lazerus and said that he would go to a place with wailing and nashing of teath. That was Jesus saying. Hey everyone not that such a place exists but if it did then there was this guy that was rich and went there. Not that such a place exists and then this other guy that could see him there. Even though that place doesn't exist. I guess according to Jehovahs Witness Teaching that was the only parable Jesus said that we know couldn't happen. Strange that he would use something impossible to make a point.
I also suppose the whole part about fearing the person who could send your soul to Hell was probably figurative as well.
Shayne McKinney
Jesus' appearing
Let's slow this down Shayne. Could you please explain to me what you think Jesus meant when, shortly before his death and resurrection to heaven, he said, "A little longer and the world will behold me no more"? (John 14:19) And why did Jesus describe world situations that would exist when he was again present if everyone would literally see him with their eyes anyways?
Thanks,
TJ
The respective weights of different dates
Hi Bob,
I'm certainly no expert in the field of archeology, so I haven't studied all of the secular evidence that establishes 539 BCE as the year Cyrus conquered Babylon. But as I understand it, the evidence for that date is much more plentiful than the secular evidence for 587 BCE, which is based on (I believe) a single Babylonian tablet. As one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I do look to the archeological evidence as a very important resource. But because I believe that the Bible is inspired by God, I will accept its testimony over the archeological evidence.
539 BCE is firmly established by the archeological evidence and it doesn't conflict with the Bible, but actually harmonizes with it if we also take into consideration how it affects the start of the Seventy Weeks prophecy written by Daniel that ends with the appearence of the Messiah and the end of God's special favor upon natural Israel. So I accept this as a pivotol date from which a chronology can be built around. But 587 BCE is not firmly established by the secular evidence and it clashes with the Bible, so I do not accept it.
I hope I answered your question. Take care.
TJ
please don't speak of evidence
If you mention evidence then please site it. Thank you
Shayne McKinney
The evidence for 587 bce
Is overwhelming....
1. Chronicles, historical records, and royal inscriptions from the Neo-Babylonian period, beginning with the reign of Nabopolassar and ending with the reigns of Nabonidus and Belshazzar, show it ran from 626 to 539 B.C., not from 645 to 539 B.C. as the Society claims.
2. Business and administrative documents.
3. Astronomical diaries.
4. Saros (lunar eclipse) texts.
5. Synchronisms with contemporary Egyptian chronology show Watchtower chronology consistently off by 20 years.
Great Post Bob
I could site some evidence as well, but I think that pretty much covers it. Now by checking refering URL's I've found that most of the posts the JW's have put on my site have been after being refered by email. I just wanted to ask are you guys emailing people to post and writing down the time you spend on my site as the people that do home visits do?
Just curious.
Shayne McKinney
A Reference
Hi Bob,
I don't want to cut-and-paste a whole lot of information here that can be found elsewhere. Certainly this is a topic which on which we could devote a lot of time and energy. So I would refer you to a couple of books by Dr. Rolf Furuli (who is one of Jehovah's Witnesses) that cover this particular topic extensively, Persian Chronology and the Length of the Babylonian Exile of the Jews, Volumes 1 and 2.
My main point that I think has been overlooked is that the current secular chronology does not fit with what Bible says about the length of the exile. Therefore we do not accept the secular chronology in its entirety.
Thanks Bob,
TJ
You keep saying that same thing.
point that I think has been overlooked is that the current secular chronology does not fit with what Bible says about the length of the exile. Therefore we do not accept the secular chronology in its entirety.
Have you ever studied the secular and christian date information? or have you always waited on a watchtower publication to "study" it for you.
I know the captivity was 70 years. That is why I believe the end date of the excile was 516 B.C. I have many sources that put it at that year. Let me quote a few for you...
"From the destruction of Jerusalem in the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar until the Temple was fully rebuilt in the sixth year of Darius I(Hystaspes), producing a time frame of 586-516 BC or 70 years. (Jer. 52;12-14; Ezra 6:15)"-- Wikipedia
Here is what the source for the JW's is based on
It should be noted here that the date of 538 B.C. for the first year of Cyrus is based on the work of Ptolemy. Ptolemy does not give specific astronomical data to fix the date of the 1st year of Cyrus as he does with many of the other Babylonian and Persian kings.
This is from answers.com note that the date Ptolemy gives says... Wait Ptolemy doesn't use dates. Oh and 605 is the start of the captivity according to this that varies slightly from the various dates given by the JW's depending on the time they want their prophecy to work out to.
Shayne McKinney
Desolation, not Temple-less
Shayne, I guess I keep saying the same thing because it hasn't been addressed. The problem with your chosen argument that the 70 years ended with the completion of the Temple is that the Bible does not say that. It says that the land was desolated for 70 years, that would be without inhabitants, not without a Temple. (2 Chronicles 36:21)
TJ
Desolation does not equall no inhabitents.
The word desoltation in the hebrew from this scripture is translated several times into things like destroy, destoid, laid waist, devestated and many other things that have nothing to do with a lack of inhabitents. If you look at it as being destroid then the date must be 586 BC the date when the temple and Jerusalem was destroid.
Just a small thought I'm really busy so I'll get to some other comments later. If your only reason for your date is 1914 and without inhabitents then maybe you should reconsider.
Shayne McKinney
Let's take a look at what the Bible says
Hi Shayne,
The desolation that Israel experienced by means of Babylon was something Jehovah had promised would happen at the outset of their entering into the covenant with him as penalty for continued disobedience. Leviticus 26:14-45 spells this out.
"If, however, with this you will not listen to me and you just must walk in opposition to me . . . I, for my part, will lay the land desolate, and your enemies who are dwelling in it will simply stare in amazement over it. And you I shall scatter among the nations, and I will unsheathe a sword after you; and your land must become a desolation, and your cities will become a desolate ruin.
"At that time the land will pay off its sabbaths all the days of its lying desolated, while you are in the land of your enemies. At that time the land will keep sabbath, as it must repay its sabbaths. All the days of its lying desolated it will keep sabbath, for the reason that it did not keep sabbath during your sabbaths when you were dwelling upon it." (Leviticus 26:27-35)
"All the while the land was left abandoned by them and was paying off its sabbaths while it was lying desolated without them and they themselves were paying for their error, because, even because, they had rejected my judicial decisions, and their souls had abhorred my statutes." (Leviticus 26:43)
Do you see why the desolation had to mean no inhabitants? Here is more evidence.
"[The king of the Chaldeans] carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years." (2 Chronicles 36:20-21)
So the land would pay off its sabbaths, which would amount to 70 years, once its inhabitants had been removed. A seventy-year long sabbath rest would mean no farming the entire time, so how would it even be possible for anyone to live there? Jeremiah tells us that no one did. He was stationed as prophet among the Jews who fled Judah for Egypt after Jerusalem had been destroyed and Gedaliah had been assassinated. Read carefully what he tells them:
"This is what Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel, has said, 'you yourselves have seen all the calamity that I have brought in upon Jerusalem and upon all the cities of Judah, and here they are a devastated place this day, and in them there is no inhabitant.'" (Jeremiah 44:2)
"Finally Jehovah was no longer able to put up with it because of the badness of your dealings, because of the detestable things that you had done, and so your land came to be a devastated place and an object of astonishment and a malediction, without an inhabitant, as at this day." (Jeremiah 44:22)
It's quite clear, isn't it? The devastation and desolation of Jerusalem meant that it was "without an inhabitant." The Jewish people had been scattered among the nations, thus allowing the land to experience a seventy-year long sabbath rest. This marked seventy-year period would end, not with the completion of the Temple, but with Jehovah bringing his people back into the land.
"For this is what Jehovah has said, 'In accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at Babylon I shall turn my attention to you people, and I will establish toward you my good word in bringing you back to this place.'" (Jeremiah 29:10)
So if we accept the year 539 BCE as the year Babylon was overthrown, and thus 537 BCE as the year that the Jews resettled Judah and Jerusalem, then the seventy-year desolation, when all inhabitants of the land were removed, must have begun in 607 BCE.
TJ
If desolation must mean no inhabitents?
You said:
Do you see why the desolation had to mean no inhabitants? Here is more evidence.
The problem is still this. The first attack the babylonians had they took a few prisoners, however Jerusalem was not overthrown ini one fight. It wasn't until they destroyed Jerusalem that the Jew's were completely and totally eliminated in the homeland. So the year 607 doesn't meet that date still. based on the scriptures you sited.
Example
"If, however, with this you will not listen to me and you just must walk in opposition to me . . . I, for my part, will lay the land desolate, and your enemies who are dwelling in it will simply stare in amazement over it. And you I shall scatter among the nations, and I will unsheathe a sword after you; and your land must become a desolation, and your cities will become a desolate ruin.
The city of jerusalem was fine until 586 with jewish inhabitents still. So even if the first exciles went in 607.. which is arduable then the prophecy can't start until "your cities will become desolate ruin"
Sorry Thats still not convincing.
Shayne McKinney
You have misunderstood my argument
Hi Shayne,
I am not arguing that 607 BCE was the year when Babylon first took Jewish exiles, I am arguing that that was the year when the last of the inhabitants cleared out of the land. Since the Bible clearly teaches that the land was emptied for the purpose of paying off its sabbaths (it had to be at rest for 70 years), we establish 607 BCE as the date when the last Jews living there (Jeremiah included) fled to Egypt, since Jewish people first returned to the land in 537 BCE. The first exiles of the Jews to Babylon, which included Daniel, would have then taken place at least a full decade before 607 BCE.
TJ
Agreed
Just refuting your statement that 587/586 bce is based on one tablet.
Also, there is not one Babylonian, Assyrian, Jewish, Mesopotamian historian, expert, archaeologist who agrees on the 607 date..only Jehovah's Witnesses, unless you can supply evidence to the contrary, of course.
And of course, even if 607bce WAS right, we then have a separate argument about plucking Scriptures from all over the Bible to make them fit another date..1914ce.